SC Upholds Schools' Authority to Expel; No-Homework Policy Hit

MANILA, Philippines — The Supreme Court (SC) has upheld the authority of schools and school administrators to impose all sanctions, including expulsion, on erring students as a means of maintaining order and discipline.

In a 10-page decision penned by Senior Justice Antonio T. Carpio, the SC’s second Division pointed out that” discipline in education” is specifically mandated by the Constitution, which provides that all educational institutions shall “teach the rights and duties of citizenship, strengthen ethical and spiritual values, develop moral character, and personal discipline.”

“Schools and school administrators have the authority to maintain school discipline, and the right to impose appropriate and reasonable disciplinary measures,” the Tribunal held.

“On the other hand, students have the duty and the responsibility to promote and maintain the peace and tranquility of the school by observing the rules of discipline,” it added.

The ruling arose from the case of the high school department of the Iloilo City-based University of San Agustin which, in 2002, recommended the transfer of some of its students, who were caught engaging in hazing outside the school premises, to another school.

The hazing incident, which occurred on Nov. 22, 2002, was entered into the blotter of the Iloilo City Police.

Thereafter, dialogues and consultations were conducted among the school authorities, the arrested students, and their parents.

During a meeting on Nov. 28, 2002, the parties agreed that instead of the possibility of being charged and found guilty of hazing, the students would just transfer to another school, while those who participated as neophytes would be suspended for one month.

The parents signed the minutes of the meeting to signify their conformity. Because of the agreement, the university did not anymore convene the Committee on Student Discipline (COSD) to investigate the hazing incident.

But on Dec. 5, 2002, the parents of the students sent a letter to the university president urging him not to implement the Nov. 28 agreement. They claimed the principal decided to order the immediate transfer of their children without convening the COSD.

The parents also wrote a letter to the Schools Division Superintendent, Department of Education (DepEd)-Iloilo City, seeking her intervention and prayed that their children be allowed to take the home study program instead of transferring to another school.

On Jan. 3, 2003, the students and their parents filed a complaint for injunction and damages with the Iloilo City Regional Trial Court (RTC), assailing the principal’s decision to order the immediate transfer of the students as a violation of their right to due process because the COSD was not convened.

The trial court, on Feb. 5, 2003, issued a writ of preliminary injunction and directed respondents to admit petitioner students pending resolution of the petition. Thereafter, the COSD convened to tackle the case.

On April 21 of the same year, the parents wrote the DepEd and asked that it direct the university to release the report cards and other credentials
of the students. The university, however, said it could not release the report cards due to their pending disciplinary case with the COSD.

This prompted parents and their children to file another complaint for mandatory injunction with the Iloilo City RTC, which on June 17, 2003, ordered the university to release the students’ report cards and other credentials.

After its motion for reconsideration was denied, the university filed a special civil action or certiorari with the Court of Appeals (CA). The University stressed that the trial court had no jurisdiction over the two cases filed by the students and their parents.

In its June 16, 2005 decision, the appellate court granted the university’s petition and ordered the trial court to dismiss the cases pending with the RTC for lack of jurisdiction due to the failure of the students and their parents to exhaust administrative remedies or for being premature.

The CA said the students and their parents should have waited for the action of DepEd or of the university president before resorting to judicial action.

In upholding the CA ruling, the SC ruled that the principal had the authority to order the immediate transfer of the students in view of the Nov. 28, 2002 agreement.

The High Court noted that the parents themselves “affixed their signatures to the minutes of the November, 2002, meeting and signified their conformity to transfer their children to another school.”

No-homework policy scored
In another development, public school teachers expressed dismay over the “no- homework-during weekends policy” released by the Department of Education (DepEd), saying it is “unnecessary and an attack to teachers’ academic freedom guaranteed by the Constitution.”

The Teachers’ Dignity Coalition (TDC), a 30,000-strong group, said the DepEd memo ordering teachers not to give homework on Friday for the weekend is not necessary because assignments are not meant to burden the learners.

“Homeworks are meant to teach the students self-learning, self-discipline, and time management,” TDC national chairman Benjo Basas said.

Assignments, added Basas, also teach the students to be responsible individuals and could be maximized as a “bonding activity” for parents and their children.

In order to give pupils ample time to rest and relax at home for the rest of the day, the DepEd ordered all teachers in public elementary schools nationwide not to give homework or assignments during weekends.

Through DepEd Memorandum No. 392, s. 2010 released last Sept. 16 to all bureau directors and regional directors as well as to schools division/city superintendents and heads of public elementary schools, Education Secretary Br. Armin Luistro ordered that “no homework/assignments shall be given during weekends for pupils to enjoy their childhood.”

Luistro said that homework or assignments have been part of the pupils’ lives in their schooling. “Common homework/assignments may include a period of reading done and writing to be completed, problems to be resolved, and projects to be worked on, among others,” he explained.

The purpose of which, added Luistro, is for the pupils to expand their knowledge and improve their abilities and skills. “However, it has been observed that parents complain about too many pupils’ homework/assignments, which rob themselves and their children’s quality time to be together in more enjoyable activities,” he said.

To avoid pupils from being stressed due to lots of school work to be done at home, Luistro said that teachers should limit the giving of assignments to a reasonable quantity. “No assignments/home works during weekends means that the pupils can spend quality time with their parents without being burdened by the thought of doing lots of homework,” he said.

However, the TDC said that contrary to Luistro’s claims, doing assignments at home during weekends can be turned into a bonding moment between parents and their children. “Teachers know what kind of assignments to give our students, especially those that the students can do on their own. Homework is not intended to burden children, but can actually help them develop independence and discipline even without our supervision,” TDC spokesperson Emmalyn Policarpio added. e-books for students

Meanwhile, the government has invested in the development of cheap electronic gadgets that would eventually replace printed school books, and is now working on it to eventually save students from buying printed books, Science and Technology Secretary Mario Montejo revealed.

He told Manila Bulletin that the DoST is now in the process of developing the gadget he simply calls “PC tablet”, which has the size of a computer notebook, to eventually replace printed books in schools.

“Nagde-develop kami ng [We are developing a] PC tablet to load it with book contents para hindi ka na kailangan magdala ng books [so that students would no longer have to bring books to schools,” the DoST chief said.

He said the PC tablet, which would merely cost some P3,000, would be reloadable as it would be using memory cards to store the book contents.

“If in the following semester, another set of books are needed, all you have to do is to change the memo card. So the worth of the PC tablet, which is P3,000 could be used for the entire college course as it would not just store a single book,” Montejo said.

He said they are presently coordinating with the Department of Education (DepEd) on the project, and doing it in partnership with the University of Sto. Tomas.

Edmer Panesa and Ina Hernando-Malipot, Manila Bulletin